ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Hi,
After finally fixing my Beomaster 8000, now it's time to tackle what already works, but not satisfactorily.
First, my Beogram 5005 - which works fine mechanically - doesn't sound too good. With the MMC4 restored by Axel, the sound is dull dull dull. It lacks treble.
Whatever RIAA I try, the problem doesn't change. I suspect the cartridge of course.
Any ideas?
Jacques
chartz: Hi, After finally fixing my Beomaster 8000, now it's time to tackle what already works, but not satisfactorily. First, my Beogram 5005 - which works fine mechanically - doesn't sound too good. With the MMC4 restored by Axel, the sound is dull dull dull. It lacks treble. Whatever RIAA I try, the problem doesn't change. I suspect the cartridge of course. Any ideas?
If you have another cartridge, try that first.
Collecting Vintage B&O is not a hobby, its a lifestyle.
No, only this one.
Try another amp. Maybe the BM 8000 is to blame, of course you checked all cables and connections, as the problem is the same with different preamps, the problem is somewhere else.
Yes, sounds the same on every amp or receiver. This can't be right. The previous MMC4 Axel did for me had the same problem. I checked for dirty contacts, things like that, but could find nothing.
Do you have another BG you can test the cartridge on.
Alas no, hence my question. Is the MMC4 a dull cartridge, with recessed treble?
I have here, a SMMC 4 and MMC 4, the Soundsmith MMC 4 is like a CD sound, harder and more treble, The original MMC4 is more natural sounding, meaning less treble but not that much, at times on certain records the treble on SMMC4 nearly gives distortion and I have to turn down the treble a bit, this does not happen with the MMC4, but not dull, clear and nice treble, I ask again stupid Qs: Is your tonearm correctly adjusted, (cartridge parallel to deck) is the cantilever riding in the correct height (last time your cartridge had a problem there), is the weight correctly adjusted. And is the cartridge inserted all way in.
chartz: Alas no, hence my question. Is the MMC4 a dull cartridge, with recessed treble?
No. In fact, most people call it too bright. I have 2 originals and a retip from Benny Amina. They're all on the bright side. Want to try one of mine to compare? I have a spare that sounds OK but looks a bit rough due to an FS issue I don't want to go into right now. Because of the cosmetic issue, I wouldn't be too upset if it got lost in the mail.
Søren Mexico: I have here, a SMMC 4 and MMC 4, the Soundsmith MMC 4 is like a CD sound, harder and more treble, The original MMC4 is more natural sounding, meaning less treble but not that much, at times on certain records the treble on SMMC4 nearly gives distortion and I have to turn down the treble a bit, this does not happen with the MMC4, but not dull, clear and nice treble, I ask again stupid Qs: Is your tonearm correctly adjusted, (cartridge parallel to deck) is the cantilever riding in the correct height (last time your cartridge had a problem there), is the weight correctly adjusted. And is the cartridge inserted all way in.
Not stupid questions, but with Jacques' proven technical ability, I doubt it's any of those things.
Yes, the cart is properly installed and aligned, and the tracking force is the normal one.
I'd be glad to have yours to try!
chartz: Yes, the cart is properly installed and aligned, and the tracking force is the normal one. I'd be glad to have yours to try!
OK. Let me plug it into an RX2 tonight and make sure it works properly. In the meantime, PM me your mailing address. I don't think I have it.
Will do, thanks!
Jacques,
I am not sure if you understand stylus profiles so I thought I might chime in here just to help - ignore much of this is you already do.
I am working on the presumption that your MMC4 was rebuilt as an MMC4 and not spec'd up.
Much of this has to do with the condition and pressing of records. For example, I used to use a Technics SL1200 with an Ortofon Blue cart which is the equivalent stylus profile to a MMC20EN or MMC3. I purchased some high quality repressings of a few albums such as Dusty in Memphis and Nina Simone through the 4 Men with Beards label.
With the Technics setup into my BM1900 (fully recapped), the vocals were always muffled and lacked detail in the top end, they sounded dull. This was really disappointing for a medium series cart which got rave reviews from many people, it had been aligned professionally at a shop and still I never got the results I expected, mind you, some of my pressings did sound quite nice but I was never seeing "cd quality" out of the setup.
I then purchased to a Beogram 4002 with an MMC20EN plugged into my BM1900 and I got quite nice results by these 2 particular albums always sounded dull, almost as if they had been taken off cassette tape.
A few months later I upgraded to and rebuilt a Beogram 6000 with inbuilt preamp and I also got a rebuilt MMC20EN but it had been rebuilt with a microline stylus which is a further development of the shibata - so coming into MMC2/MMC1 territory.
The new rebuilt stylus (from Garrott Bros in Australia) blew me away on both the 4002 and 6000, the only difference being the stylus profile. I found much more top end and really stunning vocals on the aforementioned records.
The point is, better stylus profiles can do two things, one is obvious, the other not so obvious. Firstly a nude eliptical (MMC20EN MMC3) will provide less simbilance and better high end detail (compared to a MMC20E or MMC4) as the stylus is directly attached to the cantilever rather than being bonded to a shank on the end of the cantilever with an adhesive. The second point is less obvious and explains why with the new microline stylus I have, the sound on old records I thought were 'worn out' has come back to life with amazing detail I never thought possible. The microline stylus sits in the groove differently to an elliptical stylus, it has greater contact with the groove wall and also contacts in different places to where the eliptical stylus made contact.
The result is that the microline is 'reading' areas of the groove which had previously not been touched by the nude eliptical stylus (and in some cases spherical stylus's from old players of people who I had purchased records at yard sales) I had used before, and this results in a much better sound (either because there is more detail in that area of the groove or because its not worn out from years of playing).
So perhaps if there is nothing technically wrong with your systems, perhaps this is an issue of expectation. I always expected my expensive repressings should sound really nice and was frequently disappointed when they sounded dull and lifeless. Going to a better stylus profile has really bought out the quality in these new records I have purchased but also made my jaw drop when listening to other pressings I have had for years which always sounded 'just ok' and I had assumed this was because they had simply been played too much.
Perhaps, just perhaps, an investment in a higher model cart such as MMC2 might be a worthwhile option if you feel your expectations are not being met.
The last step in my story is the clencher. I know the BM1900 was released as an 'audio' series amp rather than a 'hifi series' amp. A few months ago I upgraded from the BM1900 to the BM2200 and that actually took the quality of the sound to a whole new level again, playing the old EN stylus on this setup there is just tonnes of detail missing. The point here is that as you upgrade parts of your system such as speakers and amps, the other components really begin to show their weaknesses. You are running very nice speakers on one of B&O's better amps, I suspect it will show every shortcoming in that MMC4.
Drew
While I would never disagree with another member's perception of his own systems, I will say, an MMC4 can sound great. I know. I've heard it. From about 1992 to the present.
Jacques, my orphan MMC4 does sound fine on an RX2, I just checked it. The stylus guard is a bit damaged but that's all that's wrong with it. I can send it out to you just as soon as you send me your address.
Hi Rich
I agree, the MMC4 can sound great, Ive got an MMC20S at home and I am staggered by how well it holds its own for a spherical stylus, it would outperform (in my opinion) many other brand elliptical units.
The issue here is potentially subjective so just trying to offer my experience, sometimes its not a technical issue and what sounds good to one person may not be acceptable to the other :)
One more thing Jacques, is there a physical muting relay? it could be dirty and causing poor contact.
My BG4002 (totally different unit I know) had a hum in it caused by a cap in the output area and the muting relay was dirty which caused distorted sound on occasion.
Andrew,
I know cartridges well. I've had many in 30+ years, and my only concern is this freshly re-tipped MMC4. I too had a SL-1200 mkII by the way, but I used excellent Goldring cartridges.
I have very few recent pressings, and I find quality is a big issue. They are anything from badly centered, warped to being very noisy. Some are indeed excellent! But most of the time, they use CD quality masters, so why bother? I choose the CD, same sound minus vinyl flaws.
I use the 5005 in a complete 5500 system - Beomaster 5500, CD 5500, Beocord 5000 - along with Beolab 6000 speakers. The sound of the MMC4 is just lifeless, boring, with falling treble above, say, 8000 Hz.
But yes I tried other amps - Beomaster 1900, 2000, 4400, 6000, 8000, Revox A78... - with the same result.
I do have other Beograms too, among which a 3000, a 4000 and a 8000, a Thorens 160, a Dual 601... just to give you some background information.
There is no switch in the audio path. In Beograms, the muting uses grounding relays.
Rich,
You have a PM.